Jerry Hathaway
October 22, 2002


I do not want audible traffic and detectable devices put on every intersection where there is a traffic signal. I am blind traveler with a white cane. I have lived in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Utah. With the correct training I have been able to navigate all different types of intersections in good and bad weather conditions. Audible traffic signals can make it difficult to listen to traffic and make it safe for me to cross streets. It will increase the sound problems in cities where there is alot of signals close together. The problem is you can hear the sounds from the audible signals from other intersections and it can be confusing to blind persons. We can use the money that it will cost for better rehabilitation services, education, and to find better employment. When i lived in Salt Lake City, Utah they have audible traffic signals in the downtown area. They were making so much noise that people complained to the city to have them shut off at night time. The other problem that it allows the blind to rely on audible traffic signals and not the traffic and can be a safety danger. I do agree with the National Federation of the Blind views on this issue. Most intersections do not require an ATS for the accessibility and safety of blind pedestrians. Only those intersections with complex geometry, complex signalization, or varied signalization for each lane may be appropriate for an ATS.

These limited locations should be checked out by city transportation personnel and competent blind persons. The Vibrotactile indicators is more useful to blind and elderly persons who also may have hearing difficulties. Thank you for your consideration to my comments on this issue.

Sincerely yours,
Jerry Hathaway
 

left arrow index    left arrow previous comment   bullet   next comment right arrow